my first attempt at long exposure

[sedwards]

i know i could have smoothed the water even more with a nd filter , but i dont have one yet. i used my 70-200 f4L because it is so much better than my other lenses , i dont want to use them any more lol. settings were 70mm f32 5 second shutter and iso 100 . i think it looks pretty decent for what i used but i would like to hear any comments or suggestions.

IMG_0244 by sedwards679, on Flickr

IMG_0236 by sedwards679, on Flickr

[Busted Knuckles]

Nice shots, like the framing. Really like the 1st a lot , the 2nd one I would crop out the rock on the bottom - but that is just me.

RE: the smoothing effect, it is all in the eye of the beholder how much is wanted - I know some photo guys that significantly dislike "blurred water" shots - I happen to like them very much.

A lot depends on exactly the motion of the water, with additional time you don't always get more smooth, sometimes you would get more "white" and softness. 5 seconds is a long time. Every little drop sprayed up would is a white streak, more time = more drops = more streaks, enough streaks and "white" & perceived softness happens. So, if you can, return to the same spot and speed up the shutter and open the aperture and see what effect YOU like - 5 seconds, 2.5, 1, 1/2, 1/4, 1/8, 1/15, 1/30, 1/60th. If you move fast you might have all of a minute invested in the experiment.

As some shutter speed and precise condition you can get a real motion feel to the shot - if that is what YOU like - the more violent the water movement, spray, desired effect will change the combinations YOU want. Find other more violent moving water and do a couple of these 1 minute experiments and find out what you like for each circumstance.

Everyone likes something different and you can't please everyone - this forum is really great for tips and techniques to achieve what you want in an image.

The ND filter helps with being able to get shutter speeds and aperture values at what you want, i.e. depth of field, motion perspective.

Great start.

also f32 is will be getting soft from the 'pinhole' effect. as you open the aperture you will find the areas that are in focus will get sharper.

[conropl]

Busted Knuckles hit most of it on the head.

First of all, your shots look good... so my comments are more informational.

1. If you have a CPL, then use it when doing moving water shots like these. This is for two reasons:
   
   • There is a lot of reflected light that comes off wet rocks and vegitation, and they get washed out and you lose a lot of detail. You will notice a big difference in the shot if you use a CPL. For example, if you look at your first shot, the rock on the right side of the foreground has a wet spot that has a reflection that losses the detail of the rock. You can see the same thing in the moss and rocks on either side of the riffle that empties into the pool. Those areas would be very clear and colorful if you had used a CPL.
   • As Busted Knuckles said, at f/32 you are getting significant diffraction. I know on my lenses, if I close down more that f/16 or f/18 (depending on the lens) I see noticeable blur due to diffraction (ideally you want to be at f/8 - f/11). By using a CPL it does cut down the light by 1.5 to 3 stops. That would allow you to open your aperture another couple stops to get sharper detail.
   
   
2. On fast moving water you can get away with a shutter speed of 1/4 -2 seconds and still show good motion blur. So if you used a faster shutter speed, then you could open up your apertue further yet.
3. An ND filter would top things off nicely. Not so much to increase the shutter speed, as to get the aperture opened even further, and then whatever room you have left in the exposure, you can increase the shutter speed.

Overall, very nice shots. You have to be loving that lens. I remember taking a lot of waterfall pictures with my kit lens, and then when I got some good glass, I had to go back and retake everything because they just did not look good anymore. Watch out... I think you are coming down with "L" disease.

Pat

[conropl]

...RE: the smoothing effect, it is all in the eye of the beholder how much is wanted - I know some photo guys that significantly dislike "blurred water" shots - I happen to like them very much.

A few years ago my wife and I had that discussion. She did not like that I was blurring everything. So I took a series of shots at different shutter speeds and asked her which she liked better. She ended up liking the blur better (just not to much). In the end, the fast shutter speed shows all the water drops individually, and the water looks like a chaotic mess... no order. That is not how ours eyes sees things. But to each his own I guess.

So here are some examples... these are not going to win any contests for composition, but were intended to show motion blur at different shutter speeds. These were taken a few years ago with a 7D and the old version of the kit lens (before IS) EF-S18-55mm f/3.5-5.6. They have shutter speeds ranging from 0.6 - 1/125 seconds. The shutter speed (Tv), aperture (Av), and ISO setting are shown in the titles of the image:


Tv0.6-Av22-ISO100 by westmichigan, on Flickr


Tv0.3-Av22-ISO100 by westmichigan, on Flickr


Tv1/50-Av8-ISO400 by westmichigan, on Flickr


Tv1/80-Av8-ISO400 by westmichigan, on Flickr


Tv1/100-Av8-ISO800 by westmichigan, on Flickr


Tv1/125-Av8-ISO800 by westmichigan, on Flickr

[sedwards]

thank you very much guys. this is the first time i have posted pics on here that i think are almost on par with what you guys post. i didnt know that the image would be softer at tightest aperture. i thought the bigger the number the sharper the image , wrong again lol. i might try again next week if i have time.

[Busted Knuckles]

Pat, thanks for the very good set of shots - demonstrate the concept really well.
Sedwards, photography is like poker - easy to learn never mastered - that is why I like it so much after 40 years - still learning.

Mike

[bouwy]

Pat, thanks for the very good set of shots - demonstrate the concept really well.
Sedwards, photography is like poker - easy to learn never mastered - that is why I like it so much after 40 years - still learning.

Mike

Nicely explained Pat, and yes I agree with Mike's philosophy, although I still have problems learning poker.

[sedwards]

yeah i dont know how to play poker either lol.

[bouwy]

My first attempts to shoot landscapes from a moving (up, down, left, right) yacht. Not the brightest idea, but hey there's always a first time.


IMG_2938-lrwsxssydneynavybase by bouwy1, on Flickr


IMG_2850-lrwsxs by bouwy1, on Flickr